Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (12/204)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

As for the defects specific to the man, the author mentions them in his statement:

“If a woman finds her husband to be emasculated”—that is, his penis has been severed. He did not say, “If his emasculation is established,” because emasculation can be known from her side. Thus, if she says that her husband is emasculated, this is a defect, since it defeats the purpose [of marriage]. Among women’s greatest purposes are bearing children, enjoyment, and pleasure through intercourse, whereas his penis has been severed.

His statement, “or he has only what is insufficient for intercourse, she may annul the marriage,” means that only a small part of his penis remains, with which he is unable to have intercourse. Its presence is therefore like its absence.

His words indicate that if enough remains for intercourse to be possible, it is not a defect, even though full sexual enjoyment is lost. Thus, if, for example, only the extent of the glans or something similar remains—something with which intercourse is possible, but sexual enjoyment cannot be attained—it is not a defect.

His statement, “If his impotence is established by his admission”: impotence is derived from ʿinān (a rein used to lead a she-camel), and it means being restrained from intercourse. The suitability of this derivation is clear: just as a bridle restrains a camel, impotence restrains a person from intercourse—meaning that he is unable to have intercourse with his wife. This may arise later in life, or it may be natural; and, according to the sounder view, it may also arise later in life. Thus, his impotence is established by his admission, such as when he acknowledges it before the judge.

His words, “by his admission,” indicate that it is not established merely by the woman’s claim unless she produces evidence. If she says, “He is impotent,” her statement is not accepted without evidence, due to the Prophet’s saying: “The burden of proof is upon the claimant.” (1)

(1) Narrated by al-Bayhaqi, 10:252. Al-Hafiz stated in Bulugh al-Maram (1408): “Its chain of transmission is authentic.” Its basis is found in the two Sahihs, on the authority of Ibn Abbas, with the wording: “If people were given according to their claims, some would claim the blood and property of others; rather, the oath is upon the defendant.”

فالذي يختص بالرجل، ذكره المؤلف بقوله: «ومن وجدت زوجها مجبوباً» أي: مقطوع الذكر، ولم يقل: إن ثبت جَبُّه؛ لأن الجَبَّ يعلم من جهتها، فإذا قالت: إن زوجها مجبوب، فهذا عيب؛ لأنه يفوت الغرض، فمن أكبر أغراض النساء الولادة، والاستمتاع، والتلذذ بالجماع، وهذا مقطوع ذكره. قوله: «أو بقي له ما لا يطأ به فلها الفسخ»، أي: ما بقي له من ذكره جزء صغير، لا يتمكن من الوطء به، فهذا وجوده كالعدم. وعلم من كلامه أنه إذا بقي ما يمكن الوطء به فليس بعيب، مع العلم بأنه يفوت كمال الاستمتاع، فإذا بقي له ـ مثلاً ـ مقدار الحشفة، أو ما أشبه ذلك مما يمكن أن يطأ به، لكنه لا يحصل به الاستمتاع، فليس بعيب. قوله: «وإن ثبتت عُنَّتُه بإقراره» العُنة من العِنان وهو ما تقاد به الناقة، وهو أن يحبس عن الجماع، ومناسبتها للاشتقاق ظاهرة، فإن الزمام يحبس الناقة، فكذلك العنة تحبس الإنسان من الجماع، بمعنى أنه ما يتمكن من جماع زوجته، وهذا قد يحدث، وقد يكون طبيعة، وقد يكون حادثاً على القول الراجح فتثبت عنته بإقراره، كأن يقر عند القاضي. وعلم من قوله «بإقراره» أنها لا تثبت بدعوى المرأة إلا ببينة، فلو قالت: إنه عنين فلا نقبل قولها إلا ببينة؛ وذلك لقول الرسول ﵊: «البينة على المدعي» (١).

(١) أخرجه البيهقي (١٠/ ٢٥٢)؛ وقال الحافظ في البلوغ (١٤٠٨): «إسناده صحيح» وأصله في الصحيحين من حديث ابن عباس ﵄ بلفظ: لو يعطى الناس بدعواهم لادعى ناس دماء رجال وأموالهم، ولكن اليمين على المدعى عليه.